The Experts below are selected from a list of 12783 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Aldert Vrij - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Verbal Deception and the Model Statement as a Lie Detection Tool.
Frontiers in psychiatry, 2018Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Sharon Leal, Ronald P. FisherAbstract:We have been reliably informed by practitioners that police officers and intelligence officers across the world have started to use the Model Statement Lie Detection technique. In this article we introduce this technique. We describe why it works, report the empirical evidence that it works, and outline how to use it. Research examining the Model Statement only started recently and more research is required. We give suggestions for future research with the technique. The Model Statement technique is one of many recently developed verbal Lie Detection methods. We start this article with a short overview of the –in our view- most promising recent developments in verbal Lie Detection before turning our attention to the Model Statement technique.
-
Verbal Lie Detection Tools From an AppLied Perspective
Detecting Concealed Information and Deception, 2018Co-Authors: Aldert VrijAbstract:Abstract This chapter introduces seven verbal Lie Detection techniques and discusses whether they are ready for use in investigative interviews: Statement Validity Assessment (SVA), Reality Monitoring (RM), Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), Cognitive Credibility Assessment (CCA), Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE), Verifiability Approach (VA), and Assessment Criteria Indicative of Deception (ACID). Fourteen questions were developed on which to judge their suitability. There is substantial difference in the extent to which the seven Lie Detection techniques met these criteria. SCAN (the most frequently used tool in real life of the tools discussed in this chapter) falls short on numerous criteria and therefore in my view unfit for use as a Lie Detection tool. SVA is a complicated method to learn and use and in that respect RM is preferable. Regarding the imposing cognitive load technique (part of CCA), there is a risk that truth-tellers cannot cope well with the imposing cognitive load demands and, consequently, may provide similar responses as liars. I therefore do not recommend it for use in real life as a stand-alone tool, but it could be used in combination with other techniques. The remaining techniques are either ready for use to date (encouraging interviewees to say more; part of CCA, SUE, and the VA) or ready for use (asking unexpected questions; part of CCA and ACID) if they continue to receive support in empirical research. Ideally this support should come from independent labs.
-
insurance based Lie Detection enhancing the verifiability approach with a model statement component
Acta Psychologica, 2017Co-Authors: Adam Charles Harvey, Sharon Leal, Aldert Vrij, Marcus Lafferty, Galit NahariAbstract:Abstract Purpose The Verifiability Approach (VA) is verbal Lie Detection tool that has shown promise when appLied to insurance claims settings. This study examined the effectiveness of incorporating a Model Statement comprised of checkable information to the VA protocol for enhancing the verbal differences between liars and truth tellers. Method The study experimentally manipulated supplementing (or withholding) the VA with a Model Statement. It was hypothesised that such a manipulation would (i) encourage truth tellers to provide more verifiable details than liars and (ii) encourage liars to report more unverifiable details than truth tellers (compared to the no model statement control). As a result, it was hypothesized that (iii) the model statement would improve classificatory accuracy of the VA. Participants reported 40 genuine and 40 fabricated insurance claim statements, in which half the liars and truth tellers where provided with a model statement as part of the VA procedure, and half where provide no model statement. Results All three hypotheses were supported. In terms of accuracy, the model statement increased classificatory rates by the VA considerably from 65.0% to 90.0%. Conclusion Providing interviewee’s with a model statement prime consisting of checkable detail appears to be a useful refinement to the VA procedure.
-
a cognitive approach to Lie Detection a meta analysis
Legal and Criminological Psychology, 2017Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Ronald P. Fisher, Hartmut BlankAbstract:Introduction This article provides a meta-analysis of a new, cognitive approach to (non-)verbal Lie Detection. This cognitive Lie Detection approach consists of three techniques: (1) imposing cognitive load, (2) encouraging interviewees to say more, and (3) asking unexpected questions. Method A meta-analysis was carried out on studies using the cognitive approach, 14 of which directly compared the cognitive approach to a standard approach. Results The cognitive Lie Detection approach produced superior accuracy results in truth Detection (67%), Lie Detection (67%), and total Detection (truth and Lie Detection combined, 71%) compared to a traditional standard approach (truth Detection: 57%; Lie Detection: 47%; total Detection: 56%). Conclusions Practitioners may find it useful to use a cognitive Lie Detection approach in their daily practice.
-
Baselining as a Lie Detection Method
Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2016Co-Authors: Aldert VrijAbstract:Summary For entirely valid reasons, practitioners urge researchers to develop within-subjects Lie Detection methods. This article highlights some problems with the existing and popular nonverbal baseline Lie Detection method and with the use of the Validity Checklist in SVA. The article further suggests how verbal within-subjects Lie Detection methods can be introduced in interview settings by implementing verbal Lie Detection interview protocols designed in recent years. The article concludes that these within-subjects methods do not provide the ultimate solution as clear cut-off scores cannot be established, but they are a step forward in verbal Lie Detection. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Ronald P. Fisher - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
‘Language of Lies’: Urgent issues and prospects in verbal Lie Detection research
Legal and Criminological Psychology, 2019Co-Authors: Galit Nahari, Ronald P. Fisher, Pär Anders Granhag, Tzachi Ashkenazi, Irit Hershkowitz, Jaume Masip, Ewout H. Meijer, Zvi Nisin, Nadav Sarid, Paul J. TaylorAbstract:Since its introduction into the field of deception Detection, the verbal channel has become a rapidly growing area of research. The basic assumption is that liars differ from truth tellers in their verbal behaviour, making it possible to classify them by inspecting their verbal accounts. However, as noted in conferences and in private communication between researchers, the field of verbal Lie Detection faces several challenges that merit focused attention. The first author therefore proposed a workshop with the mission of promoting solutions for urgent issues in the field. Nine researchers and three practitioners with experience in credibility assessments gathered for 3 days of discussion at Bar‐Ilan University (Israel) in the first international verbal Lie Detection workshop. The primary session of the workshop took place the morning of the first day. In this session, each of the participants had up to 10 min to deliver a brief message, using just one slide. Researchers were asked to answer the question: ‘In your view, what is the most urgent, unsolved question/issue in verbal Lie Detection?’ Similarly, practitioners were asked: ‘As a practitioner, what question/issue do you wish verbal Lie Detection research would address?’ The issues raised served as the basis for the discussions that were held throughout the workshop. The current paper first presents the urgent, unsolved issues raised by the workshop group members in the main session, followed by a message to researchers in the field, designed to deliver the insights, decisions, and conclusions resulting from the discussions.
-
Verbal Deception and the Model Statement as a Lie Detection Tool.
Frontiers in psychiatry, 2018Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Sharon Leal, Ronald P. FisherAbstract:We have been reliably informed by practitioners that police officers and intelligence officers across the world have started to use the Model Statement Lie Detection technique. In this article we introduce this technique. We describe why it works, report the empirical evidence that it works, and outline how to use it. Research examining the Model Statement only started recently and more research is required. We give suggestions for future research with the technique. The Model Statement technique is one of many recently developed verbal Lie Detection methods. We start this article with a short overview of the –in our view- most promising recent developments in verbal Lie Detection before turning our attention to the Model Statement technique.
-
a cognitive approach to Lie Detection a meta analysis
Legal and Criminological Psychology, 2017Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Ronald P. Fisher, Hartmut BlankAbstract:Introduction This article provides a meta-analysis of a new, cognitive approach to (non-)verbal Lie Detection. This cognitive Lie Detection approach consists of three techniques: (1) imposing cognitive load, (2) encouraging interviewees to say more, and (3) asking unexpected questions. Method A meta-analysis was carried out on studies using the cognitive approach, 14 of which directly compared the cognitive approach to a standard approach. Results The cognitive Lie Detection approach produced superior accuracy results in truth Detection (67%), Lie Detection (67%), and total Detection (truth and Lie Detection combined, 71%) compared to a traditional standard approach (truth Detection: 57%; Lie Detection: 47%; total Detection: 56%). Conclusions Practitioners may find it useful to use a cognitive Lie Detection approach in their daily practice.
-
Which Lie Detection tools are ready for use in the criminal justice system
Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2016Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Ronald P. FisherAbstract:We introduce ‘arousal based’ Lie Detection tools (the Behavior Analysis Interview, the Comparison Question polygraph Test, CQT) and ‘cognition based’ Lie Detection tools (imposing cognitive load, encouraging interviewees to say more, asking unexpected questions, Strategic Use of Evidence, Verifiability Approach and Concealed Information polygraph Test, CIT), and discuss whether they are ready for use in investigative interviews. We developed ten criteria on which to judge their suitability. The two arousal-based techniques (frequently used) fall short on numerous criteria. There are too many problems associated with the imposing cognitive load technique, but the other cognitive techniques are ready for use (encouraging interviewees to say more and Strategic Use of Evidence) or ready for use if they continue to receive support in empirical research (asking unexpected questions and Verifiability Approach). The CIT polygraph test cannot be included in a standard investigative interview but can be useful in addition to investigative interviewing.
-
Thermal Imaging as a Lie Detection Tool at Airports
Law and Human Behavior, 2011Co-Authors: Lara Warmelink, Samantha Mann, Sharon Leal, Aldert Vrij, Dave Forrester, Ronald P. FisherAbstract:We tested the accuracy of thermal imaging as a Lie Detection tool in airport screening. Fifty-one passengers in an international airport departure hall told the truth or Lied about their forthcoming trip in an interview. Their skin temperature was recorded via a thermal imaging camera. Liars’ skin temperature rose significantly during the interview, whereas truth tellers’ skin temperature remained constant. On the basis of these different patterns, 64% of truth tellers and 69% of liars were classified correctly. The interviewers made veracity judgements independently from the thermal recordings. The interviewers outperformed the thermal recordings and classified 72% of truth tellers and 77% of liars correctly. Accuracy rates based on the combination of thermal imaging scores and interviewers’ judgements were the same as accuracy rates based on interviewers’ judgements alone. Implications of the findings for the suitability of thermal imaging as a Lie Detection tool in airports are discussed.
Daniel D Langleben - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
polygraphy and functional magnetic resonance imaging in Lie Detection a controlled blind comparison using the concealed information test
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 2016Co-Authors: Daniel D Langleben, Kosha Ruparel, Jonathan G Hakun, David Seelig, An Li Wang, Warren B Bilker, Ruben C GurAbstract:OBJECTIVE Intentional deception is a common act that often has detrimental social, legal, and clinical implications. In the last decade, brain activation patterns associated with deception have been mapped with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), significantly expanding our theoretical understanding of the phenomenon. However, despite substantial criticism, polygraphy remains the only biological method of Lie Detection in practical use today. We conducted a blind, prospective, and controlled within-subjects study to compare the accuracy of fMRI and polygraphy in the Detection of concealed information. Data were collected between July 2008 and August 2009. METHOD Participants (N = 28) secretly wrote down a number between 3 and 8 on a slip of paper and were questioned about what number they wrote during consecutive and counterbalanced fMRI and polygraphy sessions. The Concealed Information Test (CIT) paradigm was used to evoke deceptive responses about the concealed number. Each participant's preprocessed fMRI images and 5-channel polygraph data were independently evaluated by 3 fMRI and 3 polygraph experts, who made an independent determination of the number the participant wrote down and concealed. RESULTS Using a logistic regression, we found that fMRI experts were 24% more likely (relative risk = 1.24, P < .001) to detect the concealed number than the polygraphy experts. Incidentally, when 2 out of 3 raters in each modality agreed on a number (N = 17), the combined accuracy was 100%. CONCLUSIONS These data justify further evaluation of fMRI as a potential alternative to polygraphy. The sequential or concurrent use of psychophysiology and neuroimaging in Lie Detection also deserves new consideration.
-
Using Brain Imaging for Lie Detection: Where Science, Law, and Policy Collide
2012Co-Authors: Daniel D Langleben, Jane Campbell MoriartyAbstract:Progress in the use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of the brain to differentiate lying from truth-telling has created an expectation of a breakthrough in the search for objective methods of Lie Detection. In the last few years, litigants have attempted to introduce fMRI-based Lie Detection evidence in courts. Both the science and its possible use as courtroom evidence have spawned much scholarly discussion. This article contributes to the interdisciplinary debate by identifying the missing pieces of the scientific puzzle that need to be completed if fMRI-based Lie Detection is to meet the standards of either legal reliability or general acceptance. The article provides a balanced analysis of the current science and the cases in which litigants have sought to introduce fMRI-based Lie Detection. Identifying the key limitations of the science as expert evidence, the article explores the problems that arise from using scientific evidence before it is proven valid and reliable. We conclude that the Daubert’s “known error rate” is the key concept linking the legal and scientific standards. We suggest that properly controlled clinical trials are the most convincing means to confirm or disprove the relevance of this promising laboratory research. Given the controversial nature and potential societal impact of this technology, collaboration of several government agencies may be required to sponsor impartial and comprehensive clinical trials that will guide the development of forensic fMRI technology.
-
Emerging neurotechnologies for Lie-Detection: Promises and perils
American Journal of Bioethics, 2010Co-Authors: Paul Root Wolpe, Kenneth R. Foster, Daniel D LanglebenAbstract:Detection of deception and confirmation of truth telling with conventional polygraphy raised a host of technical and ethical issues. Recently, newer methods of recording electromagnetic signals from the brain show promise in permitting the Detection of deception or truth telling. Some are even being promoted as more accurate than conventional polygraphy. While the new technologies raise issues of personal privacy, acceptable forensic application, and other social issues, the focus of this paper is the technical limitations of the developing technology. Those limitations include the measurement validity of the new technologies, which remains largely unknown. Another set of questions pertains to the psychological paradigms used to model or constrain the target behavior. Finally, there is little standardization in the field, and the vulnerability of the techniques to countermeasures is unknown. Premature application of these technologies outside of research settings should be resisted, and the social conversation about the appropriate parameters of its civil, forensic, and security use should begin.
-
towards clinical trials of Lie Detection with fmri
Social Neuroscience, 2009Co-Authors: Jonathan G Hakun, Kosha Ruparel, James Loughead, Ruben C Gur, David Seelig, E Busch, Daniel D LanglebenAbstract:Recent reports of successful fMRI-based discrimination between Lie and truth in single subjects raised the interest of prospective users and a public concern about the potential scope of this technology. The increased scrutiny highlighted the lack of controlled "real life", i.e. prospective clinical trials of this technology that conform to the common standards of medical device development. The ethics of conducting such trials given the paucity of data on fMRI-based Lie Detection has also been questioned. To probe the potential issues of translating the laboratory research into practice, we conducted a case study in which we adapted the standard Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT), a well-established model of producing deception, to the common scenario of lying on a resume. The task consisted of questions about pertinent items on the subject's resume, three of which could be independently verified as truth (KNOWN) and three that could not be verified and were thus termed UNKNOWN. The subject had an incentive to Lie on all UNKNOWN items, and on debriefing confirmed that he had done so. Data was preprocessed, masked with a priori regions of interest, thresholded, and qualitatively evaluated for consistency with the previously reported prefronto-parietal Lie > Truth pattern. Deceptive responses to two out of the three UNKNOWN items were associated with the predicted prefronto-parietal fMRI pattern. In the third UNKNOWN this pattern was absent, and instead, increased limbic (amygdala and hippocampus) response was observed. Based on published prefronto-parietal Lie response pattern, only the first two items could be categorized as Lie. If confirmed, this demonstration of amygdala and hippocampus activation in a Lie > Truth contrast illustrates the need to integrate the limbic system and its emotional and cognitive correlates into the existing model of deception. Our experiment suggests an approach to a naturalistic scenario and the research questions that need to be answered in order to set the stage for prospective clinical trials of fMRI-based Lie Detection.
-
commentary the future of forensic functional brain imaging
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 2008Co-Authors: Daniel D Langleben, Frank M DattilioAbstract:In “Functional MRI Lie Detection: Too Good to be True?” in this issue of The Journal, Joseph Simpson reviews the merits and the limitations of using fMRI to detect deception. After presenting the gaps in experimental data that stand in the way of translating the laboratory proof of concept to a field application, Simpson surveys the legal, regulatory and ethics concerns facing fMRI, should it emerge as a technologically robust method of Lie Detection. In our commentary, we update and interpret the data described by Simpson, from the points of view of an experimental scientist and a forensic clinician. We conclude that the current research funding and literature are prematurely skewed toward discussion of existing findings, rather than generation of new fMRI data on deception and related topics such as mind-reading, consciousness, morality, and criminal responsibility. We propose that further progress in brain imaging research may foster the emergence of a new discipline of forensic MRI.
Sharon Leal - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Verbal Deception and the Model Statement as a Lie Detection Tool.
Frontiers in psychiatry, 2018Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Sharon Leal, Ronald P. FisherAbstract:We have been reliably informed by practitioners that police officers and intelligence officers across the world have started to use the Model Statement Lie Detection technique. In this article we introduce this technique. We describe why it works, report the empirical evidence that it works, and outline how to use it. Research examining the Model Statement only started recently and more research is required. We give suggestions for future research with the technique. The Model Statement technique is one of many recently developed verbal Lie Detection methods. We start this article with a short overview of the –in our view- most promising recent developments in verbal Lie Detection before turning our attention to the Model Statement technique.
-
insurance based Lie Detection enhancing the verifiability approach with a model statement component
Acta Psychologica, 2017Co-Authors: Adam Charles Harvey, Sharon Leal, Aldert Vrij, Marcus Lafferty, Galit NahariAbstract:Abstract Purpose The Verifiability Approach (VA) is verbal Lie Detection tool that has shown promise when appLied to insurance claims settings. This study examined the effectiveness of incorporating a Model Statement comprised of checkable information to the VA protocol for enhancing the verbal differences between liars and truth tellers. Method The study experimentally manipulated supplementing (or withholding) the VA with a Model Statement. It was hypothesised that such a manipulation would (i) encourage truth tellers to provide more verifiable details than liars and (ii) encourage liars to report more unverifiable details than truth tellers (compared to the no model statement control). As a result, it was hypothesized that (iii) the model statement would improve classificatory accuracy of the VA. Participants reported 40 genuine and 40 fabricated insurance claim statements, in which half the liars and truth tellers where provided with a model statement as part of the VA procedure, and half where provide no model statement. Results All three hypotheses were supported. In terms of accuracy, the model statement increased classificatory rates by the VA considerably from 65.0% to 90.0%. Conclusion Providing interviewee’s with a model statement prime consisting of checkable detail appears to be a useful refinement to the VA procedure.
-
Using the verifiability Lie Detection approach in an insurance claim setting
Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 2016Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Galit Nahari, Rebecca Isitt, Sharon LealAbstract:In this experiment, we tested the verifiability approach in an insurance claim setting. Core of the verifiability approach is that truth tellers give more details that can be verified than liars. Fifty undergraduate students took part, who produced true and false insurance claim statements related to theft, loss, or damage. These statements were coded in terms of verifiability (the number of details that could be checked by an investigator) and witness factors (friends, police, other officials and CCTV cameras). Truth tellers provided more verifiable details than liars and liars provided more unverifiable details than truth tellers. In addition, truth tellers (versus liars) more frequently informed their friends about the incident or referred to CCTV footage of the incident. The potential and limitations of using the verifiability approach in insurance settings are discussed.
-
translating theory into practice evaluating a cognitive Lie Detection training workshop
Journal of applied research in memory and cognition, 2015Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Samantha Mann, Sharon Leal, Zarah Vernham, Femke BrankaertAbstract:Abstract A training workshop utilising the most up to date research in cognitive Lie Detection was designed and evaluated. For this evaluation, 27 experienced police detectives each interviewed one mock-suspect (a truth teller or liar) before training and another mock-suspect (a truth teller or liar) after training. Different mock-crimes were used in the pre- and post training interviews. The police detectives were free to interview the mock-suspect in any way they felt appropriate but were asked to try to incorporate (some of) the taught techniques in the post-training interviews. The detectives made veracity judgements and the interviews were transcribed and coded for the amount of detail elicited and the questions asked. Trainees’ ability to distinguish truth tellers from liars improved, and so did the percentage of appropriate questions they asked. Trainees did not implement the taught techniques to an equal extent, but when they were used, the techniques enhanced the elicitation of information and discrimination between truth tellers and liars. The training study also revealed challenges, particularly difficulty in implementing the taught techniques into practice (detectives often thought they had used techniques taught in the training when they in fact not used them as they had been shown to do) and asking the right questions to elicit differences in detail between truth tellers and liars.
-
Outsmarting the Liars: Toward a Cognitive Lie Detection Approach
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2011Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Samantha Mann, Pär Anders Granhag, Sharon LealAbstract:Five decades of Lie Detection research have shown that people’s ability to detect deception by observing behavior and listening to speech is limited. The problem is that cues to deception are typically faint and unreliable. The aim for interviewers, therefore, is to ask questions that actively elicit and amplify verbal and nonverbal cues to deceit. We present an innovative Lie Detection perspective based on cognitive load, demonstrating that it is possible to ask questions that raise cognitive load more in liars than in truth tellers. This cognitive Lie Detection perspective consists of two approaches. The imposing-cognitive-load approach aims to make the interview setting more difficult for interviewees. We argue that this affects liars more than truth tellers, resulting in more, and more blatant, cues to deceit. The strategic-questioning approach examines different ways of questioning that elicit the most differential responses between truth tellers and liars.
Samantha Mann - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
translating theory into practice evaluating a cognitive Lie Detection training workshop
Journal of applied research in memory and cognition, 2015Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Samantha Mann, Sharon Leal, Zarah Vernham, Femke BrankaertAbstract:Abstract A training workshop utilising the most up to date research in cognitive Lie Detection was designed and evaluated. For this evaluation, 27 experienced police detectives each interviewed one mock-suspect (a truth teller or liar) before training and another mock-suspect (a truth teller or liar) after training. Different mock-crimes were used in the pre- and post training interviews. The police detectives were free to interview the mock-suspect in any way they felt appropriate but were asked to try to incorporate (some of) the taught techniques in the post-training interviews. The detectives made veracity judgements and the interviews were transcribed and coded for the amount of detail elicited and the questions asked. Trainees’ ability to distinguish truth tellers from liars improved, and so did the percentage of appropriate questions they asked. Trainees did not implement the taught techniques to an equal extent, but when they were used, the techniques enhanced the elicitation of information and discrimination between truth tellers and liars. The training study also revealed challenges, particularly difficulty in implementing the taught techniques into practice (detectives often thought they had used techniques taught in the training when they in fact not used them as they had been shown to do) and asking the right questions to elicit differences in detail between truth tellers and liars.
-
Outsmarting the Liars: Toward a Cognitive Lie Detection Approach
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2011Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Samantha Mann, Pär Anders Granhag, Sharon LealAbstract:Five decades of Lie Detection research have shown that people’s ability to detect deception by observing behavior and listening to speech is limited. The problem is that cues to deception are typically faint and unreliable. The aim for interviewers, therefore, is to ask questions that actively elicit and amplify verbal and nonverbal cues to deceit. We present an innovative Lie Detection perspective based on cognitive load, demonstrating that it is possible to ask questions that raise cognitive load more in liars than in truth tellers. This cognitive Lie Detection perspective consists of two approaches. The imposing-cognitive-load approach aims to make the interview setting more difficult for interviewees. We argue that this affects liars more than truth tellers, resulting in more, and more blatant, cues to deceit. The strategic-questioning approach examines different ways of questioning that elicit the most differential responses between truth tellers and liars.
-
Thermal Imaging as a Lie Detection Tool at Airports
Law and Human Behavior, 2011Co-Authors: Lara Warmelink, Samantha Mann, Sharon Leal, Aldert Vrij, Dave Forrester, Ronald P. FisherAbstract:We tested the accuracy of thermal imaging as a Lie Detection tool in airport screening. Fifty-one passengers in an international airport departure hall told the truth or Lied about their forthcoming trip in an interview. Their skin temperature was recorded via a thermal imaging camera. Liars’ skin temperature rose significantly during the interview, whereas truth tellers’ skin temperature remained constant. On the basis of these different patterns, 64% of truth tellers and 69% of liars were classified correctly. The interviewers made veracity judgements independently from the thermal recordings. The interviewers outperformed the thermal recordings and classified 72% of truth tellers and 77% of liars correctly. Accuracy rates based on the combination of thermal imaging scores and interviewers’ judgements were the same as accuracy rates based on interviewers’ judgements alone. Implications of the findings for the suitability of thermal imaging as a Lie Detection tool in airports are discussed.
-
detecting true and false opinions the devil s advocate approach as a Lie Detection aid
Acta Psychologica, 2010Co-Authors: Sharon Leal, Samantha Mann, Aldert Vrij, Ronald P. FisherAbstract:We examined the efficacy of a new approach to detect truths and Lies in expressing opinions: the Devil's Advocate approach. Interviewees are first asked an opinion eliciting question that asks participants to argue in favour of their personal view. This is followed by a Devil's Advocate question that asks participants to argue against their personal view. People normally think more about reasons that support rather than oppose their opinion. Therefore we expected truth tellers to provide more information and shorter latency times in their responses to the opinion eliciting question than to the Devil's Advocate question. Liars are expected to reveal the opposite pattern as the Devil's Advocate question is more compatible with their beLiefs than is the opinion eliciting question. In Experiment 1, we interviewed seventeen truth tellers and liars via the Devil's Advocate approach and measured the difference in number of words and latency times to the two questions. Our hypotheses were supported. In Experiment 2, 25 observers were shown these interviews, and made qualitative judgements about the statements. Truth tellers' opinion eliciting answers were seen as more immediate and plausible and revealed more emotional involvement than their Devil's Advocate answers. No clear differences emerged in liars' answers to the two types of question. We conclude that the Devil's Advocate approach is a promising Lie Detection approach that deserves attention in future research.
-
Drawings as an innovative and successful Lie Detection tool
Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2009Co-Authors: Aldert Vrij, Samantha Mann, Sharon Leal, Pär Anders Granhag, Lara Warmelink, Ronald P. FisherAbstract:Professionals typically use verbal, nonverbal or physiological Lie Detection tools (Vrij, 2008). There are several drawbacks associated with such tools. First, many tools are complicated to use and it can take several months to train someone properly in their use (Vrij, 2008). Second, the actual application of such tools can be time consuming. For example, speech analyses are typically carried out on transcripts of verbal statements (Masip, Sporer, Garrido, & Herrero, 2005; Vrij, 2005), and in physiological Lie Detection, examinees are attached to a polygraph (Raskin & Honts, 2002), undergo electroencephalograms (EEGs, Rosenfeld, 2002) or undergo functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain scanning (Spence, Farrow, Herford, Wilkinson, Zheng, & Woodruff, 2001). Third, some of the tools are expensive, both in terms of equipment (e.g. fRMI bran scanner) and in their use (recording EEGs and fMRIs). Analysing someone’s behaviour is perhaps the least complicated way to detect Lies but accuracy rates based on such veracity judgements tend to be low (Bond & DePaulo, 2006; Vrij, 2008; Vrij, Mann, Fisher, & Kristen, 2007).